Skip to main content

Table 3 Multivariate analysis of factors associated with baseline VL suppression in FLC for Option B+ RCT participants

From: Prevalence of undetectable and suppressed viral load in HIV-infected pregnant women initiating Option B+ in Uganda: an observational study nested within a randomized controlled trial

Characteristics

Unadjusted OR

(95% CI)

p-value

Adjusted ORa

(95% CI)

p-value

Site

    

 Urban-Kampala

1.000

   

 Rural-Mityana

0.829 (0.509–1.352)

0.453

  

Age

    

 18–24 years

1.000

   

 25–34 years

0.929 (0.605–1.425)

0.735

  

 35 + years

0.655 (0.261–1.643)

0.367

  

Marital status

    

 Married/co-habiting

1.000

 

1.000

 

 Never married

1.396 (0.820–2.378)

0.219

1.275 (0.742–2.192)

0.379

 Separated/divorced/widowed

0.171 (0.023–1.287)

0.086

0.153 (0.020–1.156)

0.069

Educational level

    

 University/College/Tertiary

1.000

   

 Secondaryb

1.995 (0.574–6.928)

0.277

  

 Primaryb

1.867 (0.534–6.521)

0.328

  

 No education

1.944 (0.407–9.287)

0.405

  

Religion

    

 Catholic

1.000

   

 Protestant

0.897 (0.521–1.546)

0.696

  

 Moslem

0.752 (0.419–1.352)

0.341

  

 SDA/Pentecostal/others

0.890 (0.497–1.594)

0.695

  

Tribe

    

 Non-Ganda

1.000

   

 Ganda

0.794 (0.524–1.204)

0.278

  

Gravidity

    

 1

1.000

   

 2

1.081 (0.583–2.000)

0.804

  

 3

0.875 (0.471–1.625)

0.672

  

 4 + 

0.744 (0.404–1.371)

0.343

  

Disclosure to partner

    

Yes

1.000

   

 No

0.736 (0.482–1.125)

0.156

  

 No partner

0.663 (0.183–2.399)

0.532

  

Disclosure to otherc

    

 Yes

1.000

 

1.000

 

 No

0.647 (0.425–0.986)

0.043

0.640 (0.416–0.982)

0.041

Any source of income

    

 No

1.000

   

 Yes

0.542 (0.224–1.316)

0.176

  
  1. aVariables that had unadjusted p-value > 0.10 were not included in adjusted model
  2. bPartial or completed level of education
  3. cWe compared disclosure to other using the likelihood ratio test (LHRT) and the goodness of fit of a reduced model that considered only the disclosure to people who are not a woman’s partner(s) with the final model that considered both disclosure to people other than a woman’s partner(s) and marital status variables. We obtained a LHRT of 7.07 and a p-value of 0.0291. This suggests that the two models were not equivalent and that the final model had a better fit to the data